Should a Man have an Absolute Right to Choose to Abort His Baby?

Henrin said:

Can someone help me understand how abortion and child support are equivalent?

Click to expand...

I agree and somewhat agree with Excon here. we are talking about the sex act and not the outcome. The man and the woman agreed to have sex. And sex doesn't mean agreeing to have children. Therefore if a woman can end all responsibility of the sex act at any time (before birth) then the man gets that same choice. Once the woman has made her decision to keep or abort and the man gets his option to abort or take responsibility, then the woman can utilize the information about the man to make the final choice. One of those outcomes is that the woman bears all responsibility or to terminate once she knows what the man will do. after she learns what the man will do, she still has the option to terminate.

I don't believe it is her responsibility only for the sex act but choice should be extend to both parties. We are not equating abortion to child support. we are equating the decision to abort or not (taking responsibility or not for the woman) to the decision to abort financial support or not (taking responsibility for the man).

Imagine this scenario

guy hops into bed with girl

guy says-are you protected

Girl lies and says

I am on the pill

she gets pregnant

now tell me why the guy should be on the hook for paternity

What we are seeing is pro-life men militantly demanding a right to use economic extortion against a woman he made pregnant to try to force her to have an abortion or face economic destitution and raising a child in poverty.

This thread PROVES absolutely that nearly all pro-life men not only do NOT care about "the unborn baby" - but rather they are THE MOST PRO-ABORTION of all for unwanted pregnancies IF it might affect him as a man.

This thread consists primarily of the FAKE pro-life men demanding a right to force/extort a woman to abortion if he is the man of an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy.

If he doesnt want a child, he could watch where he sticks it.

joko104 said:

What we are seeing is pro-life men militantly demanding a right to use economic extortion against a woman he made pregnant to try to force her to have an abortion or face economic destitution and raising a child in poverty.

This thread PROVES absolutely that nearly all pro-life men not only do NOT care about "the unborn baby" - but rather they are THE MOST PRO-ABORTION of all for unwanted pregnancies IF it might affect him as a man.

This thread consists primarily of the FAKE pro-life men demanding a right to force/extort a woman to abortion if he is the man of an unplanned and unwanted pregnancy.

Click to expand...

to the left, it isn't a baby. it is a clump of cells. I have no problem allowing men to release financial responsibility to a clump of cells.

TurtleDude said:

Imagine this scenario

guy hops into bed with girl

guy says-are you protected

Girl lies and says

I am on the pill

she gets pregnant

now tell me why the guy should be on the hook for paternity

Click to expand...

TD...since when does the pill protect against pregnancy 100% why take that chance? But the real deal is...in your scenario...if the guy just jumps in bed with someone that he has to ask if she is protected...why isn't he protecting himself from at least STD's if he not worried about the possibility of pregnancy?

TurtleDude said:

Imagine this scenario

guy hops into bed with girl

guy says-are you protected

Girl lies and says

I am on the pill

she gets pregnant

now tell me why the guy should be on the hook for paternity

Click to expand...

Because he is one of the two biological parents. She is on the hook financially took if the child is born, exactly the same as the man. Read up on it. You are claiming a lie. NO STATE exempts women from child support obligations.

YOU have not answered why I should have to pay for YOUR kid at a taxpayer. Nor have you explained your right to make a child and then trash that child you made in relation to the child.

What is clear? You don't give a damn about any child you make EXCEPT to extent it benefits you. Unfortunately, every year, there are more biological fathers with your attitude about his own children.

opendebate said:

That childish.

Click to expand...

No that not childish.
:doh

opendebate said:

We all know that a child can be result and we all know that we need to protect ourselves. They are both responsible

Click to expand...

If you want to get down to the nitty-gritty of it, actually they are not.
It is her body. We all know this. She decides what goes in to it, and comes out of it. No one else.

She allowed herself to be penetrated without protection on it. That is all her fault.


Secondly, your argument is untenable because we are at the point where she gets to choose whether she has a child or not.
The man should be given the same effective right to choose.

hallam said:

to the left, it isn't a baby. it is a clump of cells. I have no problem allowing men to release financial responsibility to a clump of cells.

Click to expand...

Then you are "on the left" - except then your previous message that you oppose abortion IS A BIG LIE - isn't it?

You are being honest. You are OPPOSED to abortion if ALL duties land on the woman. You SUPPORT abortion if ANY duty might land on the man.

Nearly all FAKE pro-life men on the forum are in agreement with you. MILITANTLY, VEHEMENTLY pro-abortion IF that let's the man off the hook.

Deadbeat dad's claiming life is so unfair to them are as despicable as it gets in my opinion of it.

I HATE CHILD ABUSERS. And men who abandon their children FOR ANY REASON are child abusers in my opinion. They all should be in prison. Sterilized too.

joko104 said:

Then you are "on the left" - except then your previous message that you oppose abortion IS A BIG LIE - isn't it?

You are being honest. You are OPPOSED to abortion if ALL duties land on the woman. You SUPPORT abortion if ANY duty might land on the man.

Nearly all FAKE pro-life men on the forum are in agreement with you. MILITANTLY, VEHEMENTLY pro-abortion IF that let's the man off the hook.

Deadbeat dad's claiming life is so unfair to them are as despicable as it gets in my opinion of it.

I HATE CHILD ABUSERS. And men who abandon their children FOR ANY REASON are child abusers in my opinion. They all should be in prison. Sterilized too.

Click to expand...

I have been pretty clear. I advocate for restrictions once a child is viable. Viability actually can restrict abortion, maybe, even up to the 23 week. And this time gets shorter and shorter with the advancement of medicine which I funded with my tax dollars.

But that isn't the law of the land. The law of the land says that a woman can abort up until delivery. And in this legal reality, men should be given the choice too.

joko104 said:

Deadbeat dad's claiming life is so unfair to them are as despicable as it gets in my opinion of it.

Click to expand...

I think you are overstepping the line with your accusations here.

Show me one father in this forum who advocates this and is a deadbeat, a child abuser or who has abandoned.

Excon said:

.

Click to expand...

It may be her body but it is his seed. The anatomical differences to not determine the level of responsibility.

She allowed herself to be penetrated without protection on it. That is all her fault.

Click to expand...

What other choices do you let people make for you so that you can avoid taking responsibility?

we are at the point where she gets to choose whether she has a child or not.The man should be given the same effective right to choose

Click to expand...

Most of us are bound to work within the parameters of reality. Meaning, at what point can a man successfully control whether or not a child results. When he decides to use condom. If he decides not to he is responsible for the results. Whatever they are.

hallam said:

I am sure glad that we have a government then because if people get to pick what they want their tax dollars to go to then we are in a heap of trouble. How about you think about it this way? Since you don't fund the entire government or any one governmental program, why don't you just pick a favorite government program and think all of your tax dollars go there. I personally just pay taxes for the NIH and NSF to fund cool research. My tax dollars fund nothing else of within the government. My state taxes, go to building highways. And my local taxes, go to funding teachers. This way your tax dollars don't pay for these deadbeat parents; other people's tax dollars do.

Click to expand...

Once again, that is absurd logic. Under your theory, government could spend 100,000 Trillion dollars and it cost me nothing, because "other people pay it."

Of course, we need to begin this with we both agreeing you don't give a **** about actually parenting a child. It's all just about money to you. In your opinion, no child even needs a parent. Just tax money that nobody has to actually pay.

When I write about "deadbeat dads" and "deadbeat parents," I do NOT just mean economic deadbeats. I mean parents who do not meet their total obligations as a parent.

joko104 said:

Once again, that is absurd logic. Under your theory, government could spend 100,000 Trillion dollars and it cost me nothing, because "other people pay it."

Of course, we need to begin this with we both agreeing you don't give a **** about actually parenting a child. It's all just about money to you. In your opinion, no child even needs a parent. Just tax money that nobody has to actually pay.

When I write about "deadbeat dads" and "deadbeat parents," I do NOT just mean economic deadbeats. I mean parents who do not meet their total obligations as a parent.

Click to expand...

I don't know your tax burden but, actually, yes the government spends trillions. And because I don't put in trillions, I get to "determine" (mentally at least) where my taxes go.

opendebate said:

It may be her body but it is his seed. The anatomical differences to not determine the level of responsibility.



What other choices do you let people make for you so that you can avoid taking responsibility?


Most of us are bound to work within the parameters of reality. Meaning, at what point can a man successfully control whether or not a child results. When he decides to use condom. If he decides not to he is responsible for the results. Whatever they are.

Click to expand...

It is apparent what these pro-life (fake pro-life) men are arguing - and the collection of lies within that - not just the total hypocrisy proving they are not "pro-life' at all. Rather, it is singularly about power over the woman.

By law, the biological mother as 100% exactly the same financial responsibility as the man when the child is born. They whine and sob and rage in total narcissism about themselves as men - instantly becoming radical pro-abortion and claiming THEY are being picked on - when the EXACT financial obligation exists for the woman.

Since they reveal their singular view of parenting is ONLY about $$$, let's hope they aren't and don't become biological parents. They appear to have total contempt for being one.

hallam said:

I don't know your tax burden but, actually, yes the government spends trillions. And because I don't put in trillions, I get to "determine" (mentally at least) where my taxes go.

Click to expand...

Amazing how many men think parenting is only about money - and how to get out of even that parental duty.

joko104 said:

Amazing how many men think parenting is only about money - and how to get out of even that parental duty.

Click to expand...

Sex isn't about procreating the last time I heard the pro-abortion side talk. Your argument is pretty illogical. Unless you are against abortion completely. A woman shouldn't be able to abort her responsibility if a man can't.

Btw, I actually do agree with you on something things but not with your patronizing tude. Parents who don't understand what parenting is shouldn't be parents and should protect themselves. People should have sex with protection and, if a dad or a woman is a deadbeat parent, they should be thrown in jail. But I don't see a man in college who has a one night stand as a deadbeat. Nor do I see that woman as whore. Mistakes happen; contraception can fail.

My argument though is theoretical, if women has choice so should men. I wish people were better too but they are not.

opendebate said:

It may be her body but it is his seed.

Click to expand...

:doh
I did say nitty-gritty.
It is seed she allowed into herself.
Her body, her control. Her fault.

opendebate said:

What other choices do you let people make for you so that you can avoid taking responsibility?

Click to expand...

WTF are you going on about?
If I allow someone to stick their part into me unprotected, I am responsible because I allowed it.

opendebate said:

Most of us are bound to work within the parameters of reality.

Click to expand...

So stop ignoring the fact that she gets a choice and he doesn't.

He should be entitled to the same effective choice she has.

opendebate said:

Meaning, at what point can a man successfully control whether or not a child results. When he decides to use condom. If he decides not to he is responsible for the results. Whatever they are.

Click to expand...

Her body, she decides what goes into it. Not him.
She is far is more responsible for any pregnancy that results. Not that this matters to the current topic of choice. As it is irrelevant.

Excon said:

:doh
I did say nitty-gritty.
It is seed she allowed into herself.
Her body, her control. Her fault.

WTF are you going on about?
If I allow someone to stick their part into me unprotected, I am responsible because I allowed it.

So stop ignoring the fact that she gets a choice and he doesn't.

He should be entitled to the same effective choice she has.
Her body, she decides what goes into it. Not him.
She is far is more responsible for any pregnancy that results. Not that this matters to the current topic of choice. As it is irrelevant.

Click to expand...

This is pointless.

hallam said:

I have been pretty clear. I advocate for restrictions once a child is viable. Viability actually can restrict abortion, maybe, even up to the 23 week. And this time gets shorter and shorter with the advancement of medicine which I funded with my tax dollars.

But that isn't the law of the land. The law of the land says that a woman can abort up until delivery. And in this legal reality, men should be given the choice too.

Click to expand...

So if you can't get what you want about abortion and women, then you want the right to abortions too? Obviously you are NOT pro-life and do NOT oppose abortion. Few men who claim the oppose abortion on the forum actually do oppose abortion.

LITERALLY, if you can't get what you want, then your attitude is "ABORT IT!"

Thus, the most bizarre and hypocritical claims over and over and over on the forum by the FAUX pro-life men. To declare "abortion is murder" - but also claim "IF SHE GETS TO KILL MY UNBORN BABY THEN I GET TO KILL MY UNBORN BABY TOO!!!"

No, you're not against abortion. You don't care about the "child" - born or unborn. You're against not having power over women. And because you don't have it, you want the right to abortion you unborn baby. You're not even a little bit pro-life or opposed to abortion. Obviously.

opendebate said:

This is pointless.

Click to expand...

Of course it is, because your position is untenable.

opendebate said:

Explain

Click to expand...

What is there to explain at this point? Lets review...

you said:

He did have a choice. He chose to have sex without a condom. His choice just comes before the pregnancy instead of after.

Click to expand...

you said:

They are both responsible. That would be more evident if you read what I was responding too.

Click to expand...

If he already had a choice by having sex then it would follow that she also already had a choice by having sex and since as you say they should both be responsible you must therefore be pro-life.

joko104 said:

So if you can't get what you want about abortion and women, then you want the right to abortions too? Obviously you are NOT pro-life and do NOT oppose abortion. Few men who claim the oppose abortion on the forum actually do oppose abortion.

LITERALLY, if you can't get what you want, then your attitude is "ABORT IT!"

Thus, the most bizarre and hypocritical claims over and over and over on the forum by the FAUX pro-life men. To declare "abortion is murder" - but also claim "IF SHE GETS TO KILL MY UNBORN BABY THEN I GET TO KILL MY UNBORN BABY TOO!!!"

No, you're not against abortion. You don't care about the "child" - born or unborn. You're against not having power over women. And because you don't have it, you want the right to abortion you unborn baby. You're not even a little bit pro-life or opposed to abortion. Obviously.

Click to expand...

I am not pro-life. Again I have been clear. I believe that there should be restrictions on abortion when a fetus (or whatever it is) is viable. This means that I still agree with government allowing for abortions to occur when a fetus isn't viable. This position can't be considered pro-life, in the meta concept of it.

But if you believe that a pregnancy is a "unborn baby" then the woman shouldn't get the choice either. Which would be equality! which I could logically see as valid but I could not support.

opendebate said:

This is pointless.

Click to expand...

You are correct in many regards:

1. Obviously the men you are "debating" totally believe in being a deadbeat in terms of non-economic parental responsibilities.
2. Obviously they will continue the lie that only men have financial duties for born children.
3. Obviously they don't care about the child one iota.
4. Obviously they want to be able to financially extort the woman to gain power over her - not just for abortion but in every possible way. "Do what I want or I'll abandon you and the child including economically.

You are debating what used to be called male chauvinistic pigs too the extreme degree - arguing that if they can't make a woman do anything and everything they want - they can just abandon their family including their own children. SO extreme that while they have posted dozens to hundreds of messages how abortion is "killing an unborn baby" - if they can't have total power over the woman that is exactly what they want to be able to do - to kill their "unborn baby" (in their view of it) as a retaliation against the woman not being totally submissive in every way.

There is no "debating" such a view and grotesque hypocrisy.

Rather, just point out what they advocate in terms of what people recognize. They furiously want the right to be deadbeat and totally absentee biological fathers - the ultimate "deadbeat dad." All their words don't change the bottom line to their advocacy. There are many, many deadbeat dads and we're "debating" them or wannabe deadbeats.

hallam said:

I am not pro-life. Again I have been clear. I believe that there should be restrictions on abortion when a fetus (or whatever it is) is viable. This means that I still agree with government allowing for abortions to occur when a fetus isn't viable. This position can't be considered pro-life, in the meta concept of it.

But if you believe that a pregnancy is a "unborn baby" then the woman shouldn't get the choice either. Which would be equality! which I could logically see as valid but I could not support.

Click to expand...

Ok, I understand you are not pro-life. Just pro-deadbeat parenting, ie pro total abandonment of a man's own child if the woman won't do what he demands of her. In reality that then isn't just his demanding she abort, but any demand he wants to make about anything.

What do you thin, in general, are a father's ethical responsibility towards his own children? Apparently you think it is only $$$.